[2025:RJ-JP:43329-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1215/2025 Prashant @ Lala S/o Shri Krishan Kumar, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Nai Mandi, In Front Of Saligram Temple, Bharatpur, Police Station Kotwali, District Bharatpur (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail Sewar, Bharatpur) Through His Wife- Smt. Seema W/o Shri Prashant @ Lala, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Nai Mandi, In Front Of Saligram Temple, Bharatpur, Police Station Kotwali, District Bharatpur (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Inspector General , Prison, Jaipur, Rajasthan. 2. The District Parole Advisory Committee, Through The District Magistrate, Bharatpur. 3. The Superintendent, Central Jail Sewar Bharatpur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG with Mr. Aman Agarwal, AAAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR Order 29/10/2025 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking benefit of regular parole. The relevant facts in brief are that the petitioner is serving the sentence of life imprisonment at Central Jail Sewar, Bharatpur after his conviction by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.2), Bharatpur (for brevity ‘the learned trial court’) vide judgment dated 16.11.2011 under Section 302 IPC. [2025:RJ-JP:43329-DB] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1215/2025] In its meeting dated 05.08.2025, respondent No.2- District Parole Advisory Committee rejected his candidature for grant of regular parole on account of unsatisfactory jail conduct. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has served the sentence of twenty years and six months and has already availed benefit of parole on as many as seven occasions and always surrendered back in time. He submits that right to parole is an important and valuable right of a prisoner which cannot be denied by the State Authorities on whims. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition be allowed and the petitioner be extended benefit of regular parole. Per contra, learned Government Advocate cum Additional Advocate General, opposing the prayer, submitted that since, on 02.09.2024, the petitioner was punished with forfeiture of five days remission on account of his misconduct, he has rightly been denied the benefit of parole. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the writ petition. Heard. Considered. The right to parole on satisfactory jail conduct is a valuable and statutory right of a prisoner and it cannot be denied in an arbitrary manner. We find from the record that petitioner has already availed benefit of seven regular paroles with no complaint of its misuse on any of the occasions. True it is that he was punished with the forfeiture of remission for a period of five days vide order dated 02.09.2024 as he resisted personal search but, it is also undisputed that upon his search, nothing objectionable was recovered from his possession. In view of this misconduct of trivial nature, we are not satisfied that the respondents were justified in [2025:RJ-JP:43329-DB] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1215/2025] denying the benefit of regular parole to the petitioner in the aforesaid factual backdrop. Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed. The order dated 05.08.2025 passed by the respondent qua the petitioner denying him benefit of regular parole is quashed and set aside and respondents are directed to extend him the benefit of regular parole. The Jail Authorities are directed to release the petitioner on regular parole for a period of 40 days on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Superintendent, Central Jail Sewar, Bharatpur with the stipulation that he shall surrender before the Jail Authorities on the expiry of the parole period and shall maintain peace and tranquility during the parole period. The 40 days’ parole period shall be counted from the date of the petitioner’s release. In case the petitioner fails to surrender by stipulated date/time, the Jail Authorities shall be free to proceed against him in accordance with law. (PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J Chandan/77